Talk:SorryNotSorry/@comment-26420931-20160505215913/@comment-3284502-20160505223304
I'm sorry and I might sound like a prick but First rule of being a decent human being - if you need to preface your thoughts with that, maybe don't post them online. If you're going to be a dick and you know it, you should stop. I think it's Really insane and Laughable that people are Crying Sexist over the the Female Suits like get over Yourself I'm sorry, why should we refrain from posting our opinions on things like this? We are allowed to dislike the costume designs and as I said before, something being for kids does not exclude them from being sexist. If you think something being for fun excludes it from criticism, that is simply not true and you are the one who needs to get over themselves. what next your gonna cry about the black Ranger being Black face I can't with people sometimes ���� Someone wearing a costume coloured black is not even remotely comparable to blackface. Meanwhile, a sexist costume can absolutely be a sexist costume. Enough false equivalencies and condescending dismissal please. people know how to Suck the Fun out of everything and Nitpick at all kinds of stuff Some of us don't find these costumes 'fun'. For us, there's no fun to suck out. Should we just not voice any problems we have with something to avoid spoiling other's fun? Well I'm sorry (no I'm not) but I refuse that request. No matter what you're discussing, there will always be someone out there who enjoys it. That doesn't shield it from critique. If you enjoy the suits, enjoy the freaking suits. Nobody's upset you do. Other people don't enjoy the suits, so kindly return the courtesy of not getting pissy over it. There's Nothing Sexualzing about the Female Suits The Suits morph on to their Body Becky G and Naomi Scott have Boobs on their body's There's a difference between gendering characteristics and sexualizing. Gendering characteristics are putting things traditionally considered 'feminine' or 'masculine' on something that otherwise has no reason to have it - for example, tits in armour or a skirt on the suit. The only reason they're there is so you can tell who's a girl and who's a boy, which is unnecessary and obnoxious when it's only done to the girls. The sexualizing part comes from why it was done. These characters do not exist in a vaccuum - someone made these creative decisions. And they decided to put these characteristics in, most likely for the purpose of fanservice. That's not cool and that WOULD be sexualizing their characters. And while the in-universe reason (the suits morphing onto their bodies) might make sense for the boobs, it does not make sense for A) The armour. As was previously explained, armour doesn't work that way. Morphing or not, the suits should still be functional and these are not, and B) The heels. Pretty dang sure those weren't done just because it's part of their bodies. I don't see them on the boys - or do boys not possess heels in their feet? The have power rangers zeo suits also had breasts because of the Actress there's nothing to be outrage and rent about like take at chill pill A) The Zeo suits aren't armour, with the exception of the gold ranger. B) Why are we using Zeo of all things as the yardstick? This movie is based off Might Morphin'. C) Again, Zeo didn't exist in a vaccuum - people made those creative decisions as well and it's completely valid to criticize them. People don't have to like Zeo's choices either. D) Armour is still supposed to be functional and does not work that way - there are pieces on those suits that are clearly armour pieces and so the suits should be functioning like armour. E) Zeo is a terrible example if you're arguing Power Rangers have no gendering characteristics. Both their female rangers got stuck in skirts - which are bad for combat, unnecessary, and served no purpose BUT to distinguish them as girls.